Editor's note: Bradley Blankenship is a Prague-based American journalist, political analyst and freelance reporter. The article reflects the author's opinions and not necessarily the views of CGTN.

Russian President Vladimir Putin on March 18 responded to U.S. President Joe Biden's comment that Putin is a "killer," saying that his American counterpart's comment was psychological projection while also wishing him good health. Putin followed this up by saying that he would be open to holding public online talks with Biden in the coming days, which is unlikely at this stage as the U.S. ups the ante on anti-Moscow pressure.

The exchange between the two leaders comes in the wake of a few key events. Number one, a declassified U.S. intelligence report published lately alleges that Putin personally authorized efforts to undermine Biden's candidacy in the 2020 U.S. presidential election.

Russia denied these allegations as "another set of groundless accusations against our country of interfering in American internal political processes," adding that the report was based "solely [on] the confidence of the intelligence services of their self-righteousness," and that "no facts or specific evidence of such claims were provided."

It follows similar allegations from 2016 when Russia had also allegedly interfered in the U.S. elections to help former President Donald Trump ascend to the White House. The allegation, however, was never proven and the goal post was constantly shifted as the liberal media ran with the story for nearly Trump's entire term. Sans evidence, the idea that Trump was essentially a Russian spy became ubiquitous in the minds of his political detractors even though his administration was objectively hostile to Russia.

According to a 2018 article for Foreign Policy magazine by the Atlantic Council's Daniel Vajdich, Trump's Russia policy was better than former President Barack Obama's. That was almost the exact title of the article. However, unlike most civilized human beings, for Vajdich and this prevailing breed of foreign policy wonk better means more aggressive. For them, judging whether something is good apparently depends on whether it pushes two nuclear-armed states to the brink of war.

Despite the reality that Trump was indeed not a peacemaker for U.S.-Russia relations, the political damage was done because of the so-called "Russiagate" fake scandal. Biden and his ruling Democratic Party now basically have a blank check with their base to turn up the heat on Russia while making it look like justice for the ills of the Trump years, because to them, Russia caused Trump.

On Thursday, something else happened in Russia's neighborhood. The Group of Seven (G7), which comprises the United States, Canada, Japan, Britain, France, Germany and Italy, said that it's committed to more sanctions against Russia over the issue of Ukraine.

Such a move, clearly emanating from Washington, would put EU-Russia ties to an even lower point and run the serious risk of severing them altogether since the bloc's largest economies are represented in the G7. Already, biannual EU-Russia summits are no longer taking place and working groups between the two are diminishing. And there is an entrenched anti-Russian sentiment in former Eastern Bloc countries in the EU that has corresponded with decades of American influence.

Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said in February that Russia is ready to break off ties completely with the bloc if new sanctions are introduced, which would make relations with individual member states complicated. This would probably be a serious blow to Russia, to be sure. Russia is the EU's fifth largest trading partner while the EU is Russia's largest trading partner, as well as a major source of investment and technology.

However, if what Lavrov says is true, Russia is self-sufficient enough to manage this, though there would surely be some pain in the immediate aftermath. This would only entrench hardline positions and make stability in Europe even more difficult. Russia is indeed no stranger to this.

When the Soviet Union was formed in 1922 after the Russian Revolution, it was the most sanctioned nation on the planet. This experience created serious problems for the emerging superpower as it adopted a siege mentality to ward of foreign interference, while also relying on self-sufficiency to build its socialist project.

Indeed successful in ensuring the Soviet Union survived some of its most difficult periods and built its economy, it had the unintended consequence of not necessarily isolating the Soviet Union, but actually creating two competing blocs in the world. This was the basic foundation of the 20th century Cold War.

To avoid a replay of this scenario, Western countries should avoid the same mistakes. For Biden, despite where the mainstream currents in Washington are, he should bear in mind the diplomatic rationale of one of his predecessors, former President Obama, that talking to adversaries is not a reward.

(If you want to contribute and have specific expertise, please contact us at opinions@cgtn.com.)